A few days after the release of the latest census data, I happened to be participating in a television studio discussion on the continuing distress in agriculture. With nearly 2,500 farmers quitting agriculture every day, and with the number of cultivators owning land declining to less than the number of landless farm labourers for the first time, the question that was asked to me was whether this was good news or bad.
âIt certainly is bad news,â I replied, adding, âBut it must have come as a great disappointment to Indiaâs planners and policymakers. They were anticipating a bigger shift in population from the rural to urban areas, and it shows that all their efforts to force the farmers to abandon agriculture have not worked so well. They have not been able to meet the economic prescription that the World Bank had prescribed.â Needless to say, the economist on the panel wouldnât agree.
At a conference organised by the MS Swaminathan Research Foundation, in Chennai, way back in 1996, I vividly recall a presentation made by Dr Ismail Serageldin, the then chairman of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research and also a vice-chairman of the World Bank. As per the World Bankâs estimates, the number of people migrating from rural to urban areas in India in another 20 years â by 2015 â would be equal to twice the combined population of UK, France and Germany, he said. The combined population of these three European countries is around 200 million. So, the World Bank had anticipated 400 million people, more than the population of US, moving out of rural areas in India in the next 20 years.
I thought this was a warning. Perhaps the World Bank was telling us to be doubly careful and initiate appropriate policy approaches to restrict the population shift, which is laced with disastrous socio-economic as well as political ramifications. No, I wasnât correct. The World Bank was actually spelling out an economic prescription. This becomes apparent when you read the subsequent World Development Reports, annual publications of the World Bank. Reading the 2008 World Development Report, I was shocked to find the bank actually asking India to speed up the population transfer by encouraging land rental markets.
At the same time, the bank made it abundantly clear that the youth in rural areas donât know anything but farming. Displacing them from agriculture without teaching them the skills to become industrial workers will only add to the rural workforce. Therefore, it suggested setting up a network of training centres where these youngsters could be trained to become industrial workers. And no wonder, in the 2009 Budget speech, just before the General Election, the then finance minister, P Chidambaram, made a budgetary provision for setting up 1,000 industrial training institutes.
I wasnât, therefore, surprised when Raghuram Rajan, the new governor of the Reserve Bank of India, parroted the same economic prescription. In an interview with The New York Times, this is what Rajan had to say: âIn terms of where will growth come from, it doesnât need to come from fancy stuff like extraordinary innovation of one kind or another. Just getting people from agriculture into services and industry itself is growth.â He has repeated the same solution to the economic woes in a Walk the Talk he had with Shekhar Gupta of the Indian Express some time ago. And as I said earlier, Rajan too is disappointed. In another interview, he admitted that the exit of people from agriculture has not kept pace with economic growth.
Soon after assuming office, when Rajan said he is not looking for the number of âlikesâ on Facebook but is contemplating some tough decisions, my impression of what he wanted to actually convey was that he will opt for âtough loveâ â tough for the aam aadmi, and love for the rich â because this is exactly what the market economy textbooks prescribe. Allow for unbridled privatisation of profits, and when the bubble bursts, socialise the costs. Itâs the poor who must make sacrifices to keep the wheels of economy churning. This is exactly what happened during the 2008-09 economic meltdown. This is what subsequently led to the Eurozone crisis, and this is what has been at the back of Indiaâs economic downturn.
Moving people out of agriculture may be the ultimate goal, but there are some ways to prop up the economy in the short term. Some time ago, senior journalist and author MJ Akbar had in one of his columns given us an excellent idea. He quoted a Russian finance minister, who in the wake of declining GDP in the country, actually asked fellow Russians that the least they can do to help the economy grow is to start drinking more vodka. The Economist, too, has among other things suggested opening up of casinos to ensure that people with surplus money do not flock to Sri Lanka on weekends. As if this is not enough, the Thai have proposed setting up massage parlours under the Indo-Thai free trade agreement that is being renegotiated. Massage parlours are, of course, a service industry.